Reference Material

Disclaimer, Copyright

The U.S.S. Mariner is in no way affiliated with, condoned or given any notice by the Seattle Mariners baseball team, who have their own website. Similarly, we have no association with the ownership group or any businesses related to the Mariners. All article text is written by the authors, all pictures are taken by the authors, who retain copyright to their works. No copying or reproduction of any content here, photographic or otherwise, is authorized. Please email us if you wish to reproduce our work.

It’s A Sellers Market

We’ve heard a lot of talk about how the economy is going to cause players with big contracts to be significantly less valuable as trade chips, and that the market for high paid players is going to be way down this summer.

So much for that. The Cardinals just traded their best prospect, Brett Wallace, along with a quality pitching prospect in Clayton Mortensen, and a third okay prospect in Shane Peterson, for two months of Matt Holliday and $1.5 million in cash. With the A’s kicking in 25% of his remaining salary, the Cardinals are on the hook for $4.5 million over the rest of the season.

Holliday’s a good player, but this is a ton to give up for a rental. To put into Mariner equivalencies, this would be similar to if the M’s had shipped off Michael Saunders, Ryan Rowland-Smith, and Tyson Gillies for Holliday. We’d all be throwing up if the M’s had made that move, so you can imagine how Cardinal fans are reacting right now. St. Louis wanted Holliday, and they paid through the nose to get him.

If Zduriencik needed a nudge one way or another on what he should do with Bedard and Washburn, this should push him towards selling. It’s clearly still very much a seller’s market.

Tags:

Comments

121 Responses to “It’s A Sellers Market”

joser on
July 24th, 2009 5:38 pm

Generally the argument against looking at the wild card is that you have more control over your destiny in your own division. But since the Angels apparently are never going to lose again, it might be worth casting a glance in the wild card’s direction. We’ll just assume the M’s can pass Texas (you have to assume that to win the division too, of course). On the positive side, the Red Sox and Tampa still have to play each other, and the Yankees, several more times. So the M’s get “help” in pushing those teams down. On the other hand, both of those teams are probably still going to win more games than the M’s. Tampa right now is on track for 88; the Red Sox could still win 95. The M’s may make it to 85 wins, but are neither of those teams going to do so?

Put another way: to end up at 84-78, the Rays would have to go 32-34 (.485) over the rest of the season; the Bosox would have to go 29-39 (.426). Sure, they’re slumping, but you really think both of these two teams are going to have losing records over the course of almost half a season? Really? That would be an epic, near-historic collapse if one team did it, and you want to believe two of the most talent-packed teams in the AL will do it in the same season? Even if you think the M’s are capable of 90 wins, the Red Sox would have to be a .500 team for the rest of the season (34-34) to come in at 89.

That’s why Salk never talks about it.

joser on
July 24th, 2009 5:45 pm

Regardless of the buyer/seller question (and it’s not either/or: I think the team could make a case for spinning off one of Bedard/Washburn for prospects while installing RRS/Vargas in the rotation and not make it look like a white flag on the season; dumping both clearly would be a tougher sell).

Anyway, regardless of that, I don’t think anything is going to happen until Cliff Lee and Halladay are no longer in play (either because they got traded, or because teams dropped out because the price was too high). Washburn and Bedard are the prizes for the runners-up.

naviomelo on
July 24th, 2009 6:11 pm

It’s a seller’s market, so let’s sell. This is becoming more and more obvious with every day that passes by. Can you imagine if we got anything near the Holliday haul for Washburn or Bedard?

We’ve played 95 games, or 58.6% of the season. We’re 5 1/2 games back. That means that for the rest of the year, we have to play over 13 games better than the Angels on a full-season pace. Even if we were the ones that traded for Matt Holliday, and got him for free, it wouldn’t be likely that we’d catch up. There just aren’t enough games left to be played.

The thing that makes 2009 so exciting is that we have Zduriencik now, so we aren’t handicapped by hoping for bad processes that lead to good outcomes. We were much closer to the division lead in 2007, but how quickly we forget. Let Zduriencik see what he can get for our two quickly diminishing assets.

msb on
July 24th, 2009 6:25 pm

OK, sounds fun, but thats not really a good bet in the Seattle market, never has been. Nobody lives here except for Richie Sexson Dave Heaverlo, and Jeff Cirrilo.

Off the top of my head … Edgar. Buhner. Wilson. Moyer. Nelson. Lampkin. Randy Myers.

You are not able to quantify team chemistry. This team has team chemistry.

Just mentioning that somebody else disagrees with original post. I’m just curious how this “clearly” makes this a sellers market?

mattpeaty on
July 24th, 2009 7:42 pm

[you’re looking for a fight that no one here is going to give you]

Mark Oh on
July 24th, 2009 7:46 pm

This is how the whole arguement begins:

I agree with Tumwater Mike that something needs to be said for cohesion. This team obviously has some good chemistry. On paper, preseason, this roster shouldnâ€™t have been much better than the team we ran out the year before.

In summation this team should more or less approximate the win total of the 2008 team. Shouldn’t have been much better.

Thanks for proving my point that 2008 and 2009 preseason win totals should have been predicted to be similar.

2008

Best season: 93-69
Worst season: 59-103

2009

I think the team, as currently composed, is about a 78 win team, give or take five wins either way for normal amounts of luck.

I shouldn’t have said that Dave didn’t predict that this was a .500 ballclub. The real arguement that I wanted to discuss was the chemistry of the team. Please don’t say that it doesn’t matter. If you have ever been in a highly productive work environment you know what I mean. Chemistry isn’t about feeling good about the people with which you work. Good chemistry would be a place where you strive to be better. Sometimes a combination of people make you want to work harder.
Also I love how the piranhas pick out little sections of a statement and don’t address the arguement.
Who is the catalyst of this sudden change and who is supporting it?

Mark Oh on
July 24th, 2009 7:49 pm

It was predicted that 2009 would have one more win than 2008. I said that this team wasn’t predicted to be much better.

2008

Best season: 93-69
Worst season: 59-103

2009

I think the team, as currently composed, is about a 78 win team, give or take five wins either way for normal amounts of luck.

Mark Oh: you clearly aren’t understanding what was actually said — either that or you’re cherry-picking. You’re also trying to rewrite history, since what you actually said was that “Preseason, on paper, 2008 looked better than 2009.” To which our response is: no, it didn’t — the 2009 team looked better.

Mark Oh on
July 24th, 2009 8:16 pm

Mark Oh on July 24th, 2009 11:36 am

I agree with Tumwater Mike that something needs to be said for cohesion. This team obviously has some good chemistry. On paper, preseason, this roster shouldnâ€™t have been much better than the team we ran out the year before.

It was one of the first things I posted today. Maybe you should read the thread. You are trying to argue semantics. You didn’t take the time to look at the context of the discussion.

Actually, you’ve almost singlehandedly dragged this comment thread horribly off-topic, so you aren’t in a position to be telling anyone else to “read the thread”.

Further chemistry-related comments will be treated like the off-topic comments that they are.

Mark Oh on
July 24th, 2009 8:21 pm

[ot]

The Dreeze on
July 24th, 2009 8:57 pm

JJ Hardy is the worst call ever. He would be Cirillo’s caddy out at Newcastle 2 months into his first season at Safeco. A right handed, .260 hitting, quasi power hitting ex-Brewer? Haven’t we tried that? That guy gets dropped by more fantasy teams than Shawn Alexander.

You know why the Cardinals sent their prospects? Because they have money, and they have Pujols, and they are going to win the World Series this year. Who cares if a prospect projects to be a solid number 4 starter in 2017. By the time any of those players are good, the A’s will have already traded them back to the Cardinals for prospects in a rebuilding effort to get back to the World Series in 2037.

The A’s big 3???

We have a better big 3 right now.

The Ancient Mariner on
July 24th, 2009 9:28 pm

Dreeze: way to distort everything. In any case, the Cards are far from guaranteed even to make the WS, let alone win it; but that sort of mindset is one big reason why, despite everything, it really does look like a seller’s market this year.

John D. on
July 24th, 2009 11:19 pm

And they have lost ground in the AL West. And the Wild Card aint happenin.

Let’s revisit this October 5.

BTW, are you aware that the MARINERS are closer to the RED SOX than they are to the ANGELS?

SonOfZavaras on
July 25th, 2009 1:18 am

I think it’s still possible to improve this year’s squad, AND build for the future.

That’s no bold or unique statement, Dave’s endorsed that from Day One….but I believe it still holds true.

But by “improving this year’s squad”, I don’t mean “overtake the Angels” as a primary goal. I think that primary goal should now be to take steps to match and exceed the moves our division rivals have made to improve themselves for the future.

It’s very clear to me that this team- as it stands- does not have the horses for the 2009 title, they just don’t. If the Angels were playing at something other than meta-human levels, it’d be one thing.

But the Angels are playing like what they are- the best team in our division. It’s our bad luck they’re playing their best prolonged stretch of baseball right when we needed them to falter.

But falter they’re not doing, and so I think it’s time we sell, sell, sell…and buy a little, too.

We can pitch with most teams, play much better than average ML defense- but we just don’t have enough bats to be in this at this time.

And the elephant-sized hole is- of course- at shortstop.

But, there’s the rub. Where to go for improvements? Hell, our own erstwhile shortstop is living proof what a depressed market it is for ML-caliber shortstops. If Betancourt hadn’t been a shortstop (loosest sense of word here), we’d’ve had to settle for a Coke machine that works, maybe a free 18-pack thrown in.

Internal options? Years away. I know the two names currently in the org- Gabriel Noriega, Juan Diaz- that the M’s hope come through.

If/when he signs, Nick Franklin might get included in that group. I have my doubts about him as a SS, but really, that’s another discussion…

Free agency could hardly be more fallow in Winter 2009, at the SS slot in particular. A really quite vexing situation for an off-season when we have a lot of bad money coming off the books.

That’s why I think finding a fairly long-range SS- with a bat AND glove- is very important in 2009.

J.J. Hardy. Stephen Drew. Jack Wilson. Reid Brignac. Any one of them would make sense to bring in. This is where Zduriencik’s biggest test of the year sits….find the right guy and get him without doling out the farm.

Hardy for Bedard and Washburn would absolutely qualify as that- turning two depreciating assets into a guy who’ll play for us well in 2010.

(If I can sing just a bit of praise, Dave- yeah, I thought that scenario was brilliant, it made me wish I’d thought of it.)

And then…what other talent is there, waiting to be sold at under-value terms? If one looks around, I bet some interesting trinkets are still there to be had.

(And who’s been better at finding under-valued trinkets this year than Jack Zduriencik?)

We all know Ian Snell can be had for a song, maybe a short medley of Isley Brothers tunes. He wants no part of the Buccos, they want to get rid of him ASAP.

Trade them Balentien and a guy like Nathan Adcock, and watch Snell become a stabilizing rod at the back-end of the rotation.

You can get wins from Snell that you’d also get from Washburn, I really believe this. Plus, lots of chances to pick up another starter for a promising young player or two. What would the Padres want for Chris Young? The Rockies for Aaron Cook? The Marlins for Ricky Nolasco?

This has been a really long post, and I’m a notch below realllly drunk, I best cut this off where it is.

But, basic point: The Mariners are better than what they were, and have a real chance to get MUCH better, soon. I’m now in favor of sell a lot, buy a little…as long as a shortstop comes back, some way, somehow.

jimmylauderdale on
July 25th, 2009 6:32 am

JJ Hardy is the worst call ever. He would be Cirilloâ€™s caddy out at Newcastle 2 months into his first season at Safeco. A right handed, .260 hitting, quasi power hitting ex-Brewer? Havenâ€™t we tried that? That guy gets dropped by more fantasy teams than Shawn Alexander.

Well, damn, if he sucks in fantasy baseball I want no part of him on the M’s. Thanks for adding your light to the discussion.